sexual advances - the big question

which reminds me, has anyone considered this issue from the perspective of banana slugs?

i have constructed an existence for myself where men's feelings about pretty much everything are prioritised just after those of banana slugs.

it is pretty great actually.

chibi I think yo have misunderstood the nub of the issue.

It is about menz' feelings.

unbelievable that anyone needs to be told this

only they don't, because these aren't good faith errors, they are slimy bastards using whatever power they have to coerce people to fuck them, and who then turn around when called on it and say 'how was i supposed to know that woman in the lift didn't want my hand up her skirt? honest mistake!'

to me it seems obvious

is there a chance that the person you are making advances to might feel compelled to accept (because you have power over them, their career, their safety, their education etc etc etc)?

if yes, leave them alone. let them approach you, if necessary. don't put people in a position where they have to worry about what the fallout might be if they say no.

if you do make an overture which is rejected, accept this and move on. the person who rejected you is not a stupid bitch, or ugly, or in need of verbal abuse or violence because being rejected makes you feel bad.

and mostly, stop acting as if the gratification of your sexual urges is the number one concern of all and sundry. everyone is the star of their own long running serial, and whether anyone will fuck you is a tragedy that files below everyone else's radar. no one cares. cope.

You know what? Even if there is a case of misread signals and an unwanted approach, a simple "Whoops, sorry, I misread the signals there I hope you can forgive me" would suffice. As long, of course, if the groper didn't attempt it again.

But sadly, looking at Rennard, O'Brien, and all the other countless examples of "misread signals", this seldom happens.

Nope. Personally, if I was single, I am more likely to not approach at all. I cannot speak for everyone though - that's just me. I wonder why you assume the opposite? We are all different.

Is your concern that they might not be able to indicate their interest so it's better for a man to approach them in case they gratefully fall into his arms in relief that he has managed to second guess their complete lack of communicated interest?

Bit mad, that.

'Women are very good at giving signals that they are interested if they are.'

Bit of a sweeping statement, that.

I don't want women to be the gatekeepers of sex, for fuck's sake. What does that even mean?

If you can't read sexual signals after alcohol, that's your problem. Drink less.

Firstly, not all women are good at giving unambiguous signals. Everyone knows of flirtatious women who enjoy innocently flirting.

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

that was a joke right?

Hully,

You are way oversimplifying things. Firstly, not all women are good at giving unambiguous signals. Everyone knows of flirtatious women who enjoy innocently flirting. I think this is great but it will sometimes be taken wrongly. Equally, not all men are great at reading signals, especially after alcohol.

If you want women to be the "gatekeepers" of sex (i.e you want to be able to go out as a single woman and be approached by men), then you have to accept that sometimes there will genuinely be "innocent" confusion. If some other cultures (nordic ones, for instance) it is far commoner for women to approach men in bars. Friends I have known have been propositioned by women many times when they were married and clearly not interested. They have had no problem in saying no thanks without being hurt by the process. And if someone is stupidly persistent, they get told to go away in no uncertain terms, which is as it should be. If you want men to "wait", then you are essentially after a role reversal, where the woman de facto chats up the man. I don't think that is the majority view, though.

As I said it is a spectrum. Morebeta says it is all about manners. In the main it is. However, a man grabbing a junior employee's breasts at work (which I have known to happen) goes beyond that and on to assault. And when that happened the men all backed the woman and the guy (he was a very senior expat) was sent back to his home country by the company.

I think that there are areas of ambiguity. If a man, after chatting to a woman all evening, brushes her knee, she can choose to respond positively or to make clear that his advances are not welcome. If he does not persist, I don't think anyone has done anything wrong. A rejected pass is just that and, as many people have said, it is possible to reject a pass and accept rejection with good grace.

There was a very good article at the weekend (Barbara Ellen maybe?) about bum-patters, gropers, harassers etc etc in which she wondered why they continued when never ever ever in the history of the world has any woman turned round to a bum-patter and said oh please fuck me now.

So it isn't about advances, is it?

Women are very good at giving signals that they are interested if they are. Why not wait, men, and not run the awful risk of rebuffment and terrible hurt of potential rejection?

Why would you approach someone who has displayed ZERO interest and be surprised and hurt at the lack of "Oh yes please"?

Because if someone has displayed interest, AND YOU WILL KNOW - you ain't gonna be rejected.

Apologies, Chub - you weren't talking to me.

I didnt see the programme but have read the thread.

slug - what you said is bang on and I know people this has actually happened to.

" That's potentially years of investment in an education, training and career building down the drain the minute he runs his hand up your leg."

It is generally done by men in power over young subordinate women. These men know perfecly well what they are doing and let nobody pretend that it is somehow all about innocent mistakes and misunderstandings.

Taking what I have read of Toby Young's comment from the thread there is a nugget of truth in it albeit I agree with a lot of what Fastidia said.

I think it is fair to say that most single unattached people will find an advance from someone they find attractive as 'welcome'. They will obviously find it less 'welcome' from someone who is unattractive. The problem is dealing with rejecting and the rejection in a courteous manner.

In the end I always think this comes down to good manners. A man or woman who keeps hassling someone else with advances even though they are not interested is just being damn rude and inconsiderate and needs telling in no uncertain terms.

Chub - my wife has exactly the same 'right' to be offended if someone made a pass at me, so don't go creating stuff in your head that doesn't exist.

yy fastidia

altho George's boyfriend might be a bit hurt if he did make advances.

Chub,

Can you explain why not and quite what you mean by "right" (which I think I was quite clear about). Would you like it to be made illegal? Or companies to have employment policies concerning it?

It is nothing to do with "women as property". It is about the right to free speech. To be honest, the idea that you cannot proposition someone else's wife is treating that woman as her husband's property and not as an autonomous individual able to make her own decisions. Yep, you are right, you could not make it up.

Someone else's wife eh? Women as property again. Couldn't make it up.

No, people do not have the right to proposition anyone they like. Absurdly not.

Namechange,

Within reason, yes, I agree. Although, again, I think that we have to make a firm distinction between good manners, employment law and harrassment, all of which are different.

Propositioning someone else's wife is ill mannered behaviour but nothing to do with law or employment.

Appropriate, exactly NCG.

Larry, I'd qualify your statement with '...any man has a right to proposition any woman (as does any woman in reverse) if it is appropriate. You may well have meant that, but I think it's important to add it in. And appropriateness is complicated, but we all know when advances are out of order, e.g. someone else's partner, someone is otherwise engaged, someone is out of kilter emotionally etc etc. Many, many people are completely oblivious to this.

Toby Young's attitude on Any Questions was one of an entitled prick. But then he did write 'How to Lose Friends and Alienate People: A Memoir', which probably says it all.

FB,

You have turned my entire point upside down. My point is that any man has a right to proposition any woman (as does any woman in reverse). And every woman/man has a right to say no.

"If the behaviour exhibited by the attractive man is welcome, then it's not harassment. It's harassment if it's unwelcome and it continues even though it's been made clear that it's unwelcome."

Totally agree but the "and" in your sentence is important. If a man makes a clumsy advance and it is rejected, he has to accept it. However, making the advance in itself is not harrassment. You cannot make policy or law based on looks or subjective feelings.

While I agree with what FB posted about ugly men and their sense of entitlement, it's also worth pointing out that a man can be handsome, politely-spoken and apparently wealthy eg good suit and fancy watch but still be repulsive to an individual woman.

I was briefly discussing this sort of thing with a friend this evening: she has just had to involve the police because her ex-boyfriend won't fuck off and leave her alone. I was telling her that she did the right thing and that the police won't think she's a silly woman making a fuss about nothing (in fact, the police have been very efficient and helpful, he's been cautioned and may be arrested and charged). And we were discussing how gifts of flowers and chocolates are not invariably romantic if you don't like the man they are from.